#supremecourt #constitutionalamendments #pmlngovt #pti #senate #nationalassembly #supremecourt #supremecourtjudges #chaudhryghulamhussain #khawarghumman #hassanayub
Supreme Court kay Judges ki Tadad Main Izafah Wakht ki Zarurat ya...? Abid Zuberi's Detail Analysis
Supreme Court kay Judges ki Tadad Main Izafah Wakht ki Zarurat ya...? Abid Zuberi's Detail Analysis
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00I will tell you about Contempt of Court, right now there is no law.
00:07The punishments given under Contempt of Court, I don't know which law was used.
00:12Because in 2012, when Yusuf Raza Ghilani's Contempt of Court case was going on,
00:19at that time he had made a law which was struck down by Supreme Court.
00:23So, INA Pakistan says, I guess Article 264,
00:27when you strike down a law, the old law doesn't get enforced automatically.
00:36So, I believe this issue, Contempt of Court, why was it needed to be clarified,
00:42or what is it, I don't understand, and which laws were used.
00:45On Friday, you know, when it happened, Faisal Bawda Sahab had made a conference.
00:52See, Faisal Bawda Sahab, many people get a notice of Contempt,
00:56you shouldn't violate your rights.
00:57Dear viewers, we have with us the President of the former Supreme Court Bar.
01:01We know from him that all these cases, about increasing the number of judges,
01:05and the bill which is being presented to end the law of Contempt of Court.
01:10Dear viewers, first of all tell us, that in routine, if the number of judges has to increase,
01:18and that too in the Supreme Court, then this opinion, suggestion, demand,
01:24this generates normally, in the tradition, or what has been there,
01:30the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Judicial Commission, who says this?
01:34Of course, the law has to be passed by the government of the time,
01:36has to come through the Parliament, but there is an institution,
01:39the head of that institution will demand, that I want more judges, or something like this.
01:42In the past, what has been the custom?
01:44In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
01:46Mr. Shukriya Govind, see, the custom has always been, the tradition has always been,
01:50that if you want to make any change in the matter of Judiciary, or bring any law,
01:56then always, from the Superior Judiciary, i.e. the Chief Justice of Pakistan,
02:00or from his colleagues, they used to ask and bring such changes.
02:05Now see here, it is being talked about increasing the number of judges,
02:09and the same old things, that justice, justice for justice, and these things,
02:14and the cases are very pending.
02:16There is no Court of First Instance, other than Article 184.3,
02:19there are appeals, there is no trial in the Supreme Court, as such.
02:23So, they say that there is so much pendency, and justice is not being given,
02:27and an example is given, that a criminal case was delayed,
02:30and the deceased person was killed.
02:33So, these things, these are all excuses.
02:36The point is that, you yourself saw, there are 17 judges present this time,
02:39so 19 judges should work this time, there are 2 ad-hoc judges.
02:42And suppose, if you want more judges,
02:45then the Judicial Commission appoints 2 more ad-hoc judges.
02:49I mean, what is the point of increasing the number of judges?
02:52That too, a private member bill, that too, a person who was previously in PTI,
02:55now he is in JUI, and I have heard that he has been given a show-call notice from that party.
02:59So, now see, the government, this Gauhar,
03:02which Gauhar talked about, Barrister Gauhar Ali Khan, who is the chairman of PTI,
03:05he said, see, this cannot be done with private member bills,
03:09because in this, Article 74 is there, which says that,
03:12where there is a decision to be drawn from the Federal Consolidated Fund,
03:15the salaries will be drawn, for that, the Federal Government has to move the bill.
03:19Then Article 81 clearly says that,
03:22salaries will be given on the Consolidated Fund,
03:25of the Supreme Court judges and the Islamabad High Court.
03:28So, all this is also present.
03:30All these things being there, a private member bill was brought in.
03:33If the government was serious, and the public was in so much pain,
03:36then why didn't the government move it?
03:39Now, Hassan will also ask you a question.
03:42See, I don't know if you need an opinion, whatever it is,
03:45please tell us a little about the law of the Contempt of Court.
03:49So, the law is there?
03:52Yes, the law is there.
03:53Does the court have the authority?
03:55Under which article does the court have the authority?
03:58See, this article, whether this law is there or not,
04:01this Contempt of Court Ordinance of 2003,
04:04and this has also been upholded by the Supreme Court.
04:07The full bench of the Supreme Court had also upholded this law in 2003.
04:11So, 2004 is the judgement of the Supreme Court.
04:14Sir, it was repealed in 2012, right?
04:17No, that was the Contempt of Court Act.
04:20No, that was the Contempt of Court Act, which was brought in 2012.
04:23It was declared by the Supreme Court,
04:25that it is the case of the late Baaz Mohammad Bakarkat of 2012.
04:28So, the law that is applicable today is of 2003,
04:31Contempt of Court Act.
04:33And it was also upholded earlier, and also later.
04:35But if you see, even if these articles are not there,
04:38Article 204 gives the power to the Supreme Court and the High Court
04:43to decide who can appeal in Contempt.
04:45Recently, it was invoked when the notice was taken from the Supreme Court.
04:48Yes, so see, if these articles are repealed,
04:50who will suffer the loss of repeal?
04:51All of us will.
04:52Me, you, and all these registrars.
04:54Because see, it is written in it,
04:56if two judges appeal in Contempt,
04:58then you can appeal in front of three judges.
04:59If three judges appeal, then you can appeal in front of five judges.
05:01If five judges appeal, then you can appeal in front of seven judges.
05:03So, there is a section 19 of the Appeal,
05:04in which you can appeal.
05:05If three judges of the Supreme Court appeal in Contempt,
05:08then you can appeal in front of five judges in the Supreme Court.
05:11So, you can finish it.
05:12Sir, what does Article 264 say?
05:14I am forgetting.
05:15Article 264 of the Constitution.
05:17See, Article 264 says,
05:19that even if a law is repealed,
05:21even if a law is repealed,
05:22the proceedings that are going on in it,
05:24will continue.
05:25This is that law.
05:26Article 264.
05:27So, it goes beyond that.
05:29Even if a law is repealed,
05:30even if a law is repealed,
05:31its effect will be like that of a police officer.
05:32Mr. Chaudhary wants to ask you a question.
05:34Mr. Chaudhary wants to ask you a question.
05:35In your opinion,
05:36is there a law?
05:37No, there is not.
05:38So, a senior lawmaker is presenting it.
05:42I am surprised about this.
05:45I am surprised about these lawyers.
05:47Look at this bill.
05:48I am surprised about them.
05:49You see,
05:50They are mentioning Contempt.
05:52Yes, yes.
05:53Sir, listen.
05:54Mr. Zubairi.
05:55Listen to this.
05:56Mr. Zubairi is referring to the 2003 ordinance which has been upholded by the Supreme Court.
06:03He is saying that it has been repealed.
06:04Sir, it has been upholded, but when the new law was passed in 2012, the old law was abolished.
06:10He abolished the Act and said that the old law can't be repealed.
06:12Supreme Court had declared that the Contravention of the Court Act of 2012 will remain the same as it was in 2003.
06:19Let's go.
06:19It is the judgment of Baaz Mohammad Kakar.
06:21It is based on the judgment, not the law.